CK220161RT; CK220202RT

                                  STATE OF NEW YORK
                      DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                              JAMAICA, NEW YORK  11433


          -------------------------------------x
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE       ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEALS OF                                DOCKET NOS.: CK220161RT  
                                                                 CK220202RT
                    SAMUEL FIELD                                             
                                                    RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                    DOCKET NO.: CB220113OR 
                                    PETITIONER
          ------------------------------------x


          ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          On November 21, 1988, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a 
          petition for administrative review of an order issued on October 
          18, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodation known as 387 Ocean Parkway, Apt. #3G, Brooklyn, New 
          York, wherein the Administrator granted in part the owner's rent 
          restoration application.

          The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and 
          has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the 
          issue raised by the administrative appeal.

          The record reveals that on February 19, 1988, the owner filed an 
          application to restore the rent that had been reduced in Docket No. 
          BB220591S.  The rent reduction was for peeling paint and plaster, 
          cracks, and water stains throughout the entire apartment.  The 
          owner stated in the application that the apartment had been painted 
          and enclosed a copy of a painting order signed by the tenant and a 
          bill from the painter.

          The application was sent to the tenant on March 29, 1988.

          The tenant responded that the painting was done in an unworkmanlike 
          manner, that the walls and ceilings immediately started to crack, 
          and that the tenant was required to pay $150 cash to the painter.

          A physical inspection of the apartment took place on September 23, 
          1988.  The inspector reported that the entire apartment had been 
          plastered and painted properly but there was slight peeling paint 
















          CK220161RT; CK220202RT


          and plaster on the living room wall and bedroom ceiling, the 
          bedroom wall was slightly discolored, and the bathroom ceiling was 
          blistering.

          Based on this inspection, the Rent Administrator granted the 
          owner's rent restoration application in part, ordering the legal 
          regulated rent restored in the amount of 7% per month and advising 
          the owner to refile for the remaining 3% when the repairs noted by 
          the inspector are done.

          In the petition for administrative review, which was erroneously 
          assigned two docket numbers, the tenant asserts that the order 
          should be revoked because the rent reduction order reduced the rent 
          by 10% because the entire apartment required painting and 
          plastering and the rent should not be restored at all until the 
          work is completed in a workmanlike manner.

          The petition was sent to the owner on December 14, 1988.

          After careful consideration of the entire evidence of record, the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be denied.

          Section 2202.16 authorizes a rent reduction based in a finding of 
          failure to maintain essential services.  The rent reduction is to 
          be in an amount which the administrator finds to be the reduction 
          in the rental value of the housing accommodation because of the 
          decreased services.

          In the instant case, the Rent Administrator properly ordered a 
          partial rent restoration based on the inspection report that 
          revealed a partial restoration of services.  The Administrator 
          continued a 3% rent reduction which appropriately reflected the 
          change in rental value of the accommodations because of the 
          incomplete work that was done.  There is no merit to the argument 
          that all repairs must be completed in a workmanlike manner before 
          any restoration of a rent controlled rent may be ordered.

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations for 
          New York City, it is


















          CK220161RT; CK220202RT

          ORDERED, that these petitions be and the same hereby are denied and 
          the Rent Administrator's order be and the same hereby is affirmed.

          ISSUED:





                                                                            
                                                       JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                                       DEPUTY COMMISSIONER






    

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name